Should biobanks be involved in downstream intellectual property rights developed from accessing materials contained in them, and to what extent?
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$209.00 per year
only $17.42 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
References
O'Rahilly, S. & Wareham, N.J. N. Engl. J. Med. 355, 306–308 (2006).
Plomin, R., Haworth, C.M. & Davis, O.S. Nat. Rev. Genet. 10, 872–878 (2009).
Burton, P.R. et al. Int. J. Epidemiol. 38, 263–273 (2009).
Fortier, I. et al. Intl. J. Epidemiol. 39, 1383–1393 (2010).
Davis, R.L. & Khoury, M.J. Community Genet. 10, 181–185 (2007).
Knoppers, B.M. et al. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 16, 664–665 (2008).
Burton, P., Fortier, I. & Knoppers, B.M. in Human Genome Epidemiology: Building the Evidence for Using Genetic Information to Improve Health and Prevent Disease 704 (Oxford University Press, 2009).
Laurent, P. & Vilches Armesto, L. Cahiers Droit, Sciences & Technologies 3, 193–214 (2009).
P 3 G Observatory. Study Catalogue http://www.p3gobservatory.org/studylist.htm
Godard, B., Marshall, J. & Laberge, C. Community Genet. 10, 147–158 (2007).
Council of Europe. Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers to Member States on Research on Biological Materials of Human Origin. p. 8 (Strasbourg: 2006).
International Expert Group on Biotechnology, Innovation and Intellectual Property: Montreal. Toward a New Era of Intellectual Property: From Confrontation to Negotiation (September 2008). http://www.theinnovationpartnership.org/data/ieg/documents/report/TIP_Report_E.pdf
Sen, D. & Tauman, Y. Games Econ. Behav. 59, 163–186 (2007).
Directive on the legal protection of databases. in Directive 96/9/ EC, E.P. Council, Editor (11 March 1996).
Howell, R.G. et al. in Intellectual Property Law: Cases and Materials 1057 (Emond Montgomery Publications, Toronto, 1999)
Bovenberg, J.A. Nat. Biotechnol. 18, 907 (2000).
Wu, X. Berkeley Technol. Law J. 17, 571 (2002).
Freedman, C.D. Fordham Intell. Prop. Media & Ent. L.J. 13, 35 (2002).
Martino, P. Geo. J.L. & Pub. Pol'y. 4, 557 (2006).
Pachnanda, A. Buffalo Law Rev. 51, 219–250 (2003).
Feist publ'ns Inc. v. Rural Tel Serv. Co. 1991. p. 340.
Statistics Canada (Science, Innovation and Electronic Information Division). Survey of Intellectual Property Commercialization in the Higher Education Sector (2006/2005) (Statistics Canada, 2008).
Statistics Canada (Science, Innovation and Electronic Information Division). Survey of Intellectual Property Commercialization in the Higher Education Sector (2007). (Statistics Canada, 2009).
Gold, E.R. et al. PLoS Med. 7, e1000208 (2010).
Cook-Deegan, R., Chandrasekharan, S. & Angrist, M. Nature 458, 405–406 (2009).
Dent, C. et al. (eds.). in Research Use of Patented Knowledge: A Review (OECD Publications, Paris, 2006). http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/15/16/36311146.pdf
Reichman, J.H. in Non-Voluntary Licensing of Patented Inventions (UNCTAD, Geneva, 2003).
Correa, C. Intergrating Public Health Concerns Into Patent Legislation in Developing Countries (South Centre, Geneva, 2000).
Association for Molecular Pathology et al. v. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office et al. in 1:09-cv-04515. 2010, New York Southern District Court.
Caulfield, T., Bubela, T. & Murdoch, C.J. Genet. Med. 9, 850–855 (2007).
National Institutes of Health. Best Practices for the Licensing of Genomic Inventions (NIH, Washington, DC; 2005). http://www.ott.nih.gov/pdfs/70FR18413.pdf
Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development. Guidelines for the Licensing of Genetic Inventions (OECD, Paris, 2006). http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/39/38/36198812.pdf
Nielson, J. Federal L. Rev. 33, 169 (2004).
Merck & Co. v. Apotex Inc., in R.C.F. 2007. p. 588.
Micro Chemicals Ltd. v. Smith Kline & French Inter-American Corp. in R.C.S. 1972. p. 506.
Smith Kline & French Laboratories Ltd v. Attorney-General (NZ) in NZLR. 1991. p. 560.
Frearson v. Loe. in ChD. 1876. p. 48.
Madey v. Duke. in USPQ2d. 2002, Fed. Cir. p. 1737.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to acknowledge the support of the Public Population Project in Genomics (P3G) (which is hosted by the University of Montreal and financially supported by Genome Canada and Genome Quebec).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Pathmasiri, S., Deschênes, M., Joly, Y. et al. Intellectual property rights in publicly funded biobanks: much ado about nothing?. Nat Biotechnol 29, 319–323 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.1834
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.1834